Advanced
Chris Dixon@cdixon
10/22/2022

To those who say toxic culture is inevitable in scaled online communities: I’d say the web and email are doing well. There is toxic stuff of course but also sufficient tools to screen it out. Architecture matters.

In reply to @cdixon
Ayush Ranjan@ranjan3118
10/22/2022

Amen :)

In reply to @cdixon
Ivy Astrix@ivy
10/22/2022

The 'one big playground' model just doesn't work at scale, across two different forms of social media (Twitter and Clubhouse) it just descends into various forms of tribalism.

In reply to @cdixon
Ivy Astrix@ivy
10/22/2022

90's era forums actually had things figured out quite well as far as just the right amount of async and just the right amount of separation, there was a larger forums 'ecosystem', forums would invade the other sometimes but there were clearly defined community walls

In reply to @cdixon
Ian Place@ians-place
10/22/2022

The screening component is subjective though. At a certain point discretion by an individual or entity is made as to what is toxic and what isn’t. I do agree that toxic cultures can be mitigated with the right tools but context is everything.

In reply to @cdixon
MikeyPiro.eth@mikeyp
10/22/2022

I love this and I feel the promise of FC is the ability to opt out/in to scaled and subcultures with more control ease. I also believe culture is set by first movers, and the folks who started the internet believed in principles and decorum that thankfully persist today. Grateful FC started this way too.

In reply to @cdixon
10/22/2022

The biggest difference imo is that with networks like the web and email, you engage with content/communities you deliberately searched out. It’s the difference between: Users saying “hey computer, I want to see X.” versus Computers (algo recommenders, etc) saying “hey user, you want to see X.”

In reply to @cdixon
ted (not lasso)@ted
10/22/2022

+1. been thinking about how FC’s architecture draws on the positive aspects of culture, turns them to our collective advantage, and leaves behind the negative aspects as we build together. excited to think of FC as a critical vehicle for wider cultural change. the earliest evidence is FC’s cultural evolution from

In reply to @cdixon
sterlingb.eth@sterling
10/22/2022

Yeah that type of thinking assumes we have no agency in this. Nihilistic. Boring. We can build things to weed out the toxicity.

In reply to @cdixon
Nate Abbott@nate
10/22/2022

Solving spam was critical for the longevity of email (and you could argue that google did the same for the web). Wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t open architecture that allowed for competition in the client (and public evolution of the protocol, eg DKIM).

In reply to @cdixon
msg@msg
10/22/2022

clay shirky used to refer to this as filter failure

In reply to @cdixon
Hunter Lampson@hl
10/22/2022

love this idea. Internet Architecture : Digital World :: Laws of Physics : Physical Word

In reply to @cdixon
William Allen@williamallen
10/22/2022

Behance is and has been one of the largest communities for visual artists (as you know!) - and we worked hard to cultivate a culture of appreciating vs competing. It worked.

In reply to @cdixon
Nick Smith@nicksmith
10/23/2022

I believe that incentivising positive interactions and behaviours on social platforms is offering us a glimpse of what the internet should be, could be, will be. The era of profiting from hate is coming to an end.

In reply to @cdixon
10/23/2022

Values based social design does this. Standards are set and reinforced by the community

In reply to @cdixon
Rick Crosschain@rickcrosschain
10/23/2022

It’s a rampant problem in games. Me & @daes are building @gg which is infrastructure to tone this problem down

In reply to @cdixon
Ben O’Rourke@bpo
10/23/2022

What do you think foments toxic culture on Twitter/Facebook? Algos which make toxic content viral?

In reply to @cdixon
Vladimir@vlad
10/23/2022

Isn’t the better conclusion here that tools matter?

In reply to @cdixon
William Saar@saarw
10/23/2022

Hasn't email become a closed garden where big tech act as gatekeepers? Is it viable to expect your e-mails to be delivered through a provider that doesn't have a partnership team with the other big inboxes? Spam is also worse outside Gmail...

In reply to @cdixon
Hiten Shah@hiten
10/23/2022

@perl community

In reply to @cdixon
Varun Srinivasan@v
10/23/2022

Also YouTube comments went full 180 from terrible cesspool to pretty positive vibe

In reply to @cdixon
joshcs.eth ᵍᵐ@jcs
10/23/2022

@perl

In reply to @cdixon
Karthik Senthil@karthiksenthil
10/23/2022

True story! If your biz model depends on toxicity, you have no choice but to tolerate it at the minimum, and embrace it at the max. Email doesn't have a biz model (since its a protocol), so clients were able to implement filtering b/c users demanded it.

In reply to @cdixon
The DAO Joan Index@daojoan
10/23/2022

But I think human choice comes into play here as well. We curate the people in our circle. If we can’t actively curate non toxic people, we cannot expect platforms to do the work for us. Who we engage with and surround ourselves with is always up to us.

In reply to @cdixon
Chu Ka-Cheong@kc
10/25/2022

What do you think about communities in reddits? I generally think that moderation is needed to keep the toxic stuffs out, but moderation should be done by individual communities who define their rules.

In reply to @cdixon
Alex Kwon@ace
11/2/2022

100%. Architecture matters a lot. I've both seen a 5 people toxic group chat, and a 10k people-filled stadium cheering with positive vibes.

In reply to @cdixon
Alex Kwon@ace
11/2/2022

@perl re:online communities #chrisdixon